Accuracy and Correlation Between Bed Scale and Standing Scale Weights in Monitoring Volume Status in Patients Hospitalized for Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

Introduction

Heart failure (HF) is a common medical condition affecting nearly 6.5 million Americans.¹ Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) accounts for over 1 million inpatient admissions in the United States every year and results in almost $40 billion in healthcare costs.² Unfortunately, ADHF is the most common cause of Medicare readmissions with a 30-day readmission rate of roughly 23%.³ This not only impacts hospital reimbursement rates, but also increases overall costs to the healthcare system. Adequate diuresis and volume status optimization are mainstays of therapy and achieving optimal volume status prior to discharge is critical in lowering readmission rates and is associated with improved mortality. Accurate in-hospital weight assessment is vital in determining volume status. Current AHA guidelines recommend measurement of standing body weight at the same time each day during hospitalization to monitor HF treatment.⁴ However, bed scales are commonly used in hospitals instead, as standing scales require patients to be ambulatory. This is often not possible when patients are bedbound, sedated, deemed a high fall risk, or receiving medical therapy that hinders ambulation (i.e. dialysis, intra-aortic balloon pumps, Purewick urinary catheters). Limited data exist regarding the accuracy of bed scales compared to standing scales and studies suggest large discrepancies between the two.⁵ Inaccurate weight measurement may lead to medical error, unreliable volume assessment and potentially inappropriate discharge. The utilization of standing scales in lieu of bed scales may improve patient outcomes and overall quality of care in the treatment of ADHF by providing more accurate body weight measurements through a hospitalization. The purpose of this study was to compare and quantify differences in standing and bed scales in patients hospitalized for ADHF and its derivatives.

Methods

Results

43 patients participated in the study between March and April of 2023 and a total of 51 pairs of bed scale and standing scale weights were obtained. Eight patients were weighed more than once, as they remained admitted on subsequent days of data collection. By increasing the sample size to 51, our power increased to 0.86. Standing weight values ranged from 43.4 to 117 kg, with a mean of 74.0 ± 32.2 kg (95% CI, 41.8 – 106). Weight differences are detailed in Table I and displayed on a Bland-Altman graph in Figure 1. The bias ± precision between weights was 1.42 ± 1.18 kg (95% CI, -0.894 – 3.73), exceeding the recommended bias value. In addition, 71% (n=36) of participants’ weights differed by more than 0.6 kg between the bed and standing scale, 22% (n=11) differed by more than 2.0 kg, and 5.9% (n=3) differed by more than 4.0 kg (see Table I).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1. Bland-Altman Plot for Comparison of Bed and Standing Scale Weights

X-axis: average weight of each bed and standing scale weight pair. Y-axis: weight difference between each bed and standing scale weight pair. LOA = limit of agreement.

Discussion

Weight measurement is critical in the treatment of patients admitted with ADHF. While bed scale weights were precise, they produced inaccurate weights compared to standing scale weights in our study. It is worth noting that accuracy is perhaps more important than precision in this context, as patients are often transferred to different rooms with different scales over the course of admission and medications are dosed based on these recorded weights. There are a multitude of factors that can contribute to user error when weighing patients on bed scales, such as inadequate bed calibration prior to patient admission and lack of attention to having only the standard amount of linen, clothing, and equipment in place during in-bed weight measurement. A study by Schneider et al. comparing electronic bed weighing versus daily fluid balance changes highlighted the contribution of items left in the bed on weight accuracy.⁷ For patients with bed linens and/or medical equipment that could not be removed from the bed due to patient safety and/or comfort, the extra items averaged 3.5 ± 1.4 kg for each patient.⁷ Findings from this study suggest that beds may not be properly calibrated prior to weighing when extra items are left on the bed, leading to inaccurate weights.

Inaccurate weights obtained during admission can have profound medical implications. For example, weight-based medications such as anticoagulants and insulin can cause significant harm when dosed incorrectly. Additionally, the discharge weight of patients hospitalized with ADHF is often used as a reference point for outpatient volume monitoring, as clinical guidelines recommend such patients to be euvolemic at discharge. As even a weight gain of 2 pounds can be associated with decompensation and necessary readmission, an inaccurate discharge weight may interfere with outpatient volume monitoring recommendations.⁸

Further opportunities exist for improved standardized processes of bed calibration, in-bed weighing, and nursing staff education for obtaining accurate weights. When patients are able to ambulate independently, standing scales should be used to provide more accurate weight measurement and estimation of body volume status.

Conclusion

Bed scales are inaccurate compared to standing scales when weighing patients admitted and treated for ADHF. When available, standing scales are preferred as bed scale inaccuracies have the potential to lead to errors in medical management.

Sources of Funding

The purchase of standing scales was funded as part of a quality improvement grant from the Committee of Interns and Residents (CIR).

Disclosures

None

Supplemental Material

Table I

Figure 1

Appendix A